3 ms·

What is the "extinguish" part?

Zababa 5y ago
According to Wikipedia: "Extinguish: When extensions become a de facto standard because of their dominant market share, they marginalize competitors that do not or cannot support the new extensions." So if your text editor doesn't support integration with Github and a cloud vendor, or if your repositories don't support integration with an online text editor and a cloud vendor, or if your cloud vendor doesn't support integration with Github and an online text editor, this will affect your market share. I think the end goal is around "developer mindshare" (which, I admit, is a really vague concept), especially in web applications. By assembling all that they have, they can create an experience no one else can, all while leveraging open source tools. You could also imagine an integration with education (Github student pack, Azure credits, etc). At this point, they could dominate the web app market because no one else can offer such a deep integration across the stack. I think one of the differences with the "old" EEE would be that instead of intentionally crippling certain features, they are instead focusing on giving the best-in-class experience. If you consider that it's just regular competition and not EEE because of that, that's totally fair. Still, I think that we should still be wary of domination. Competition is what's pushing Microsoft to develop all those wonderful tools, and I fear that with domination they might become complacent and abuse their position.
- cxr 5y ago
  The GitHub folks were already on a roll with this before Microsoft came along. How many people don't understand the difference between Git and GitHub, don't realize that saying "can you <interact with me somehow> on GitHub?" makes the same presumptions as "can you <interact with me somehow> on Facebook?", don't give two shits about how messy their commit messages are formatted, don't realize that Git doesn't actually have PRs, don't realize that the closest analog that it does have is intended for the convenience of a core team of frequent collaborators pulling from one another (N-to-N instead of the star topology that dominates on GitHub—and not for drive-by contributors), and wouldn't know what to do with a patch if you gave it to them, or if they do, wouldn't accept one if you tried.
  - Zababa 5y ago
    That is a very good point. I had the chance to start my "Git adventure" with Mercurial on some in house software at my university. They then switched to Git with Gitlab. And now I use Git with Github. It helped me to realize which piece does what. But if you start with popular tutorials, everything is Github. Github even released a CLI wrapper around Git that integrates Github-specific concepts.
  - CRConrad 5y ago
    This has annoyed the crap out of me for a long while too. I never found out how to drive the difference -- "that's not git, that's GitHub!" -- home to people who'd just answer "What are you on about, it's the same thing!" before this idea struck me right now: "No, they're different things. Just like GMail is one e-mail server (and client), but GMail isn't the same thing as e-mail." Gonna try that next time I get onto the subject.

According to Wikipedia: "Extinguish: When extensions become a de facto standard because of their dominant market share, they marginalize competitors that do not or cannot support the new extensions." So if your text editor doesn't support integration with Github and a cloud vendor, or if your repositories don't support integration with an online text editor and a cloud vendor, or if your cloud vendor doesn't support integration with Github and an online text editor, this will affect your market share. I think the end goal is around "developer mindshare" (which, I admit, is a really vague concept), especially in web applications. By assembling all that they have, they can create an experience no one else can, all while leveraging open source tools. You could also imagine an integration with education (Github student pack, Azure credits, etc). At this point, they could dominate the web app market because no one else can offer such a deep integration across the stack. I think one of the differences with the "old" EEE would be that instead of intentionally crippling certain features, they are instead focusing on giving the best-in-class experience. If you consider that it's just regular competition and not EEE because of that, that's totally fair. Still, I think that we should still be wary of domination. Competition is what's pushing Microsoft to develop all those wonderful tools, and I fear that with domination they might become complacent and abuse their position.

cxr 5y ago
The GitHub folks were already on a roll with this before Microsoft came along. How many people don't understand the difference between Git and GitHub, don't realize that saying "can you <interact with me somehow> on GitHub?" makes the same presumptions as "can you <interact with me somehow> on Facebook?", don't give two shits about how messy their commit messages are formatted, don't realize that Git doesn't actually have PRs, don't realize that the closest analog that it does have is intended for the convenience of a core team of frequent collaborators pulling from one another (N-to-N instead of the star topology that dominates on GitHub—and not for drive-by contributors), and wouldn't know what to do with a patch if you gave it to them, or if they do, wouldn't accept one if you tried.
- Zababa 5y ago
  That is a very good point. I had the chance to start my "Git adventure" with Mercurial on some in house software at my university. They then switched to Git with Gitlab. And now I use Git with Github. It helped me to realize which piece does what. But if you start with popular tutorials, everything is Github. Github even released a CLI wrapper around Git that integrates Github-specific concepts.
- CRConrad 5y ago
  This has annoyed the crap out of me for a long while too. I never found out how to drive the difference -- "that's not git, that's GitHub!" -- home to people who'd just answer "What are you on about, it's the same thing!" before this idea struck me right now: "No, they're different things. Just like GMail is one e-mail server (and client), but GMail isn't the same thing as e-mail." Gonna try that next time I get onto the subject.